Mea Culpa...

I'm sorry, but I have to apologize.

During the Zimmerman trial, I made the fatal error of not understanding that a sitting jury could be completely incapable of not relating to people unlike themselves, much less an innocent murder victim. The mere fact that they lacked any empathy at all, for not just a black child, but even for the fact that Trayvon Martin was simply a child... That never entered into my mind, until I watched the interview with Juror B37.

While watching the interview, describing myself as flabbergasted was a gross understatement.

In my own life, I have rarely met people like that face to face. The last person I met who seemed incapable of understanding that there are people in this world unlike herself was a 2Lt that I served with at my last assignment before retiring in Virginia. She was a native of Utah, a young woman in her early twenties, who was quite taken aback by the sheer number of "colored" people in Virginia.

In all my years in the service, I've never met anyone who was surprised about diversity before... And I've had the distinction of serving with colleagues from, not only all over the country, but people who came to serve in the Air Force from other nations as well.

Anyway, when she told me that she was never in close proximity to so many Black people before, at first I didn't know what to say. Now I could have been offended by her use of the term, "colored people." I mean, who uses "colored" in 2004? Was she scared of them?

I have no idea.

But knowing that this woman was from Utah (I didn't ask her if she was a Mormon, BTW, but you can guess), I decided that I should use it as a teaching moment. After all, I was almost twice this woman's age. So, I gave it a chuckle to set her at ease and I politely mentioned to her that "colored" was an archaic term and it's best for her to not use it, especially in mixed company... As I was saying this, I couldn't even think of a person under the age of dirt, whether they're from 'Bama or whatever, who still uses it.

Anyway, I mentioned to her that it's best that she use either the term "Black" or "African-American" instead. Either one of them is perfectly fine.

Now, I had wondered if she actually said that to any old White person that she ran into there, or was I the first person that she made her observation in regards the racial make-up of Virginia. I'm quite sure that just about anyone else, whose been around the block, would advise her the same way that I did. Who knows?

But the thing is, meeting a person who seemed so socially and culturally isolated in this day and age is just too remarkable for words.

So, how in the HELL did they pick six people like that to be on that jury?

I had no idea that it could happen in 2013.

As I said, I apologize for making such a faulty assumption.

And that's the big problem, isn't it? That we have a segment of the population, especially those people who reside in the majority racial demographic and make up the upper socio-economic rung who believes that it's completely unnecessary to empathize with people unlike themselves. Even with the sheer amount of reference materials or opportunities to simply migrate in more diverse circles.

If you are any kind of minority in this country, it's imperative that you understand the make up of racial majority and higher class status. There are TV shows with these people on them. There are movies made about them... They are all over the place. If you want an education and eventually employment, it is required of you to gain some empathy of these people in order to survive in this world.

You would think that these people would have the common courtesy to relate otherwise... But apparently, it seems that there are people walking around on this well-connected planet who can get assigned to juries who have never done such a thing.

After all this talk about a post-racial, colorblind society in the wake of the election of the First Black President, it's quite clear that we still have a long way to go if we're meant to be a caring and knowledgeable nation.

A very long way.

In the future, I will strive to be more opened minded about jurors who are picked for murder trials where the victims are innocent young Black males... Of course, it would be expected of me to empathize with young WHITE male or female victims, were I to be called to serve on a jury... And I have to say that with my somewhat limited exposure to all things caucasian in this country, I could reasonably expect myself to achieve that form of understanding.

But, I just don't know what to say about White jurors like B37 on the other hand.

3. Double consciousness is only *required* of the minority

Du Bois knew this 100 years ago, and it sadly remains true today.

The minority has to devote part of its consciousness to the majority position. The majority is under no obligation to do the same. No doubt, there has been a surface change in this social dynamic since the 1960's, where the majority assumes surface features of the minority consciousness, but it is largely devoted to aesthetic and cultural forms - language, music, dress: it can be picked up strategically and discarded just as easily, like all the white, suburban raised investment bankers who loved Wu Tang when they were 17, but now think there has been "no good hip hop since the 90's" (because they are no longer in a stage of life where a minority consciousness holds meaning for them, and, indeed, they must eliminate it entirely, except as nostalgia).

The minority gets no such "off switch" for double consciousness. It is obligated for its very survival to live in double consciousness perpetually, just as you describe.

It is not surprising to me at all that you can find 6 white people in Seminole County who would lack any sense of the humanity of a young black male. I'd be surprised if a random sample of 6 white people would generate more than 2 that were able to make the leap. Because white people don't have to occupy that consciousness: it can be ignored, mocked, and mystified without penalty.

22. succinct

36. Excellent point. In a way there is even a third consciousness for the minority in majority society.

First there is their own internal consciousness

Second there is the consciousness of the majority

The third is the consciousness of being observed, when you are the only one of your type sitting in the classroom. You realize that on an almost constant basis you are the one that is being observed with varying degrees of intensity. Most of the time it is passive but sometimes (like reading Huck Finn in a literature class) active and intense, but always there.

I experienced this when I lived in Asia and for 20 years resided in areas with few 'farangs'. When I first got there I noticed a strange phenomena: when I rode on the bus everyone in the bus was actively observing me. After about six months I was on a bus and a 'farang' got on and everyone was observing that guy. I realized that he was a recent arrival and his expression (excited) and stature (tall and looming) made him stand out. I also realized that how I sat on the bus had changed. I slumped a little and was more well inscrutable if you will, and people had mostly stopped staring at me.

This Second consciousness that you refer to is a very real phenomena, especially if you are the only one of your type. If you exist in a community where you are the only one that looks like you then your eye will conform to what you see. I experienced this when after about a 6 month period where I only spoke Thai and interacted with Thais I had to go to the center of Bangkok and when I turned a corner and walked toward a new building with reflective glass and saw my own image; I was astonished and wondered who that big fat white guy was that was standing there was (and this was when I was at a weight that Americans would consider either fit or skinny!).

Until you have actually experienced it one is hard pressed to understand how your consciousness and perception is so informed by what you see. So I understand it better than those that can only intellectualize it but I cannot understand what many AA feel because in my case while it impacted me and altered my perception there was absolutely no hatred or animus among the majority population, in fact there was curiosity and friendliness. Adding suspicion and hatred to the mix really makes one realize how exhausting it is to maintain multiple levels of consciousness in a world of racial bigotry when you are the one that doesn't look like the majority.

55. Bingo! You have hit the nail on its proverbial

head. Until you have actually experienced it one is hard pressed to understand how your consciousness and perception is so informed by what you see.

Grantcart, thank you for sharing the different levels of consciousness.

Being a white female many people claim I have white privilege and can't understand discrimination. Well, please click on the link below. No, I am not pictured but I have the little bumps over my face and rest of my body. My son has the plexiform tumor on his face that causes his eye to be pushed out of its orbit. Again, not as bad as the pictures show but enough that we have empathy for those who are profiled for whatever reason.

But please, do not tell me or any of my NF friends that are white that we just don't get it. We know what it's like to be followed, to be denied entrance to public swim parks and asked to leave restaurants. For my NF friends of color - well it has to be twice as exhausting. My NF friends in the Asian countries are shunned by thier communities.

56. +++

58. I simply cannot tell you how touching your comments are.

And I am very aware of how simple cosmetic differences are major problems in the Asian community. Physical disabilities are also a major problem and it is decades away from having a solution IMO.

Let me tell you a story about a refugee couple that I met.

In our organization we made all of the logistical and medical arrangements to resettle all of the refugees in South East Asia after the Vietnam War. Our head office was in Bangkok and we seldom saw refugees there, as they were in camps and transit centers. There was one unusual case I had been hearing about and the doctors arranged to have them come into the office, really on a pretense. It was such an unusual case that they all wanted to see this particular couple. I told them that I wanted to see the couple after their examination, and I had a good reason, I wanted to see them so that I could make any special arrangements at airports along the way.

The husband was diagnosed with a type of leprosy that caused his skin to be an unmistakable shade of purple. He had no lesions just this jaw dropping skin shade. His wife was blind.

The Thai staff had them wait in a large supply room so people couldn't gawk at them, and I arrived with a translator and just had a little talk with them about their trip and what they would be facing. We would arrange a special escort to take them first on the plane and they would sit in the back row and be taken off last.

As I talked with them I noticed that they were both very handsome people and would have been universally admired except that his skin was a jaw dropping color that without advance notice would cause most people to have a shocked response and that she was very beautiful except that her eyes were obviously not normal.

The husband and I connected and it was like he could read my mind. When he picked up that I was noticing his wife's beauty he smiled like the cat that had ate the bird. He had found a beautiful bride who couldn't care less what color skin he was and he not only didn't mind that she couldn't see, it was an unusual advantage that allowed her to see him better than a sighted person, because she literally would see past the surface and into his inner self and using her hands she would have an image of his face and bone structure that, except for his skin color, would have been universally seen as 'good looking'.

I knew he knew I knew what he was thinking and we exchanged grins and a peculiarly warm discussion. I gave them advice on the challenges that would face them in the US.

The rest of the day I heard the well meaning Thai staff talk about how pathetic and sad these two were.

I cannot tell you how many times I have thought of these two and how their unusual conditions created a bond of trust and love that in just a few minutes I could tell was absolutely sublime. I knew of all of the problems in the marriages in the Thai staff and wondered how many would willingly change places to be able to experience that kind of love.

He was very proud of having a stunningly beautiful and obviously kind hearted woman as his bride and she was grateful to have someone who was not only handsome to the hands but tender and caring for her. As we continue to spend billions and billions to correct minor meaningless cosmetic changes to wrap ourselves in a narcissistic obsession one is left wondering what the cost to the human soul is.

57. great article by questlove

49. Great post, alcibiades_mystery.

This idea of double consciousness and how it works is very important, I think.

Also, I would add, is the idea among unevolved whites that race consciousness
and understanding is unnecessary as they are all color-blind or do not believe
that race should be a factor in the decision and policy making of any community,
large or small. This is the kind of thinking that opens the doors for politicians
and courts to dismantle affirmative action, minority hiring and contracting, and
just about the entire social safety net.

45. The key point is that a minority of Whites voted for President Obama.

The hope for our country are young people of all races who don't live with as heavy a yoke of racism as their parents and grandparents, they will be the beacons that lead the nation to a brighter and more equality among races.

6. First of all,

The older I get, the more convinced I am that people are hard wired differently - you are either capable of empathy and compassion for the broader human community or you are not.

The inability to empathize with people who are different is what leads to racism, homophobia, xenophobia, misogyny. And unfortunately, large segments of our population are proud of this.

The media keeps emphasizing that the jury just couldn't relate to Trayvon and Rachel. So what? When did it become morally acceptable to believe and empathize only with those like ourselves? Particularly if you are on a jury in a murder trial?

You know what I have in common with Rachel Jeantel? NOTHING. And yet I believed her, I could understand and relate to her emotions as she testified.

I have no kids of my own but I cried for Trayvon just like I cried for the Sandy Hook children. I'm not a mother but I can empathize with the grief of his parents.

On the other hand, I'm a white woman and B37 made my skin crawl, she's a disgusting racist. Listening to her interview was surreal for me, I couldn't believe what I was hearing. I kept wondering where the humanity was, where was the moral outrage that an innocent teen was shot and killed for nothing? It wasn't there and I just could not relate to a woman like this.

My personal opinion about this case was that there was institutional racism from the moment the Sanford PD arrived at the scene. And it culminated with the verdict. And that's not only a tragedy for the African American community, it's also a tragedy for our country and for all of us with a sense a human decency.

12. You have a great deal in common with Rachel Jeantel. You're a human being...

19. +1

Exactly how I feel and I'm middle aged. I'm not a mother and will never be a grandmother either but I was a child and I remember what it was like to be naive. I remember that authority figures intimidated me and I remember that my Mother is a liberal thankfully that taught me to walk a minute in someone else's shoes. I know that racism is alive and well in this country because my own sister is a racist to the core. She told me "I don't like black people" about 3 yrs ago and I was left speechless by her remark. How dare she paint all black people into the same brush? It's sickening and we don't talk anymore because I can't speak to her without wanting to bitch slap her and I'm a non-violent person. She is an example of pure racism and she's willing to admit it! And you can only imagine, she listens to Rush, O'Reilly and Hannity every damn day to further poison her mind. Her life long friends have also abandoned her as well as they told my Mother they couldn't take her hate talk anymore. It's a disease in this country and faux spews is feeding off of them racists everyday.

24. succinct

37. It is very easy

to know why she saw Zimmerman as good and Trayvon as bad. That is why the jury should have been diverse, to get other views. I even see the difference on this board between some Duers.

If it was a Blackmale in a Black neighborhood shooting a 17 year old white kid, the same people supporting Zimmerman now would want justice.

Zimmerman's defense team knew exactly which audience they wanted to play to before the Trial in the mediia. The way they worked the conservative media and talk shows, opinions was already formed. Go there right now and listen to them.

According to them, Trayvon Martin was a thug and did a lot of drugs. They also claimed he got into a fights and that is why his mom threw him out the house. The defense painted Zimmerman's portrayal of Trayvon Martin as up to no good while threatening the prosecution about bringing in Zimmerman's past. That juror thought Zimmermam was a good person with the wrong way to handle things and wanted to do too much. They were helped by the judge and rightwing media. They also blamed left wing media for it even comming to trial. They knew all the biases and sensitivities to push. They got the exact jury they wanted.

The rightwing media push the theme of clothing attire also, which Serino told the FBI, but there is no where in Zimmerman's own statements he was suspicious of Trayvon for any clothing he wore. So they painted this image of Trayvon to conservative whites. The same as the welfare queen or moochers and takers. O'mara is a conservative lawyer. Zimmerman's family and friends also did their parts in the media. The first thing they crowed about after the verdict was about Al Sharpton, Jessie Jackson and President Obama. They knew who they were feeding. I'm not giving that jury any cover. And I'll tell anybody who does, President Carter or anybodyelse, B37 did not go by any evidence. People who agree with me, should not just let them shut it under the table if you cared about Trayvon's rights. They can do it to any of us. What other avenue can you take, like Mrs Martin says, but to fight fire with fire, when justice has double standards? Should we get a gun and lock and load if I see George Zimmerman comming through my neighborhood one night or any of his supporters, because they look suspicious? Why wouldn't any Black person think any of them looked suspicious walking through their neighborhoods at night even if their cars broke down? A Republican says get on with your life, not this time Buddy! We need to come to an understanding in this country about race, and it is now the time to discuss it. And the President needs to do it!

Trayon Martin had no criminal record. Trayvon Martin had no criminal record of violence. That is the bottomline. George Zimmerman had a criminal record of violence. That is the bottomline. Trayvon Martin was convicted off hearsay, from his social media accounts. Young people or anybody that uses facebook or twitter better watch what you say or do, because people can take it as the gospel. Even if you pretend or make it up.

Look at what they did with the jewelry and a screw driver. In a Black male's possession, a screw driver becomes a burglary tool. They never did find out where the jewelry was stolen from. but the rightwing media and defense knew it was stolen because it was in Trayvon's possession and the burglary tool was the evidence.

That brings me to the Graffitti on a school wall with the initials WTF. Trayvon sure got pissed off at something or somebody, afterall he was accused of being a misfit. His best friend he confided in was Jeantel, as we know on the last night of his life.

So what can you do with a screw driver? Maybe place markings in some walls, I don't know? It would come in handy.

Then there is the marijuana pipe. For all you kids (including white kids) don't ever be caught with marijuana or even inhaling it because you will end up like Trayvon, not George Bush, Bill Clinton. Oh wait a minute, they are white? So there you have it.

54. + at least a gazillion!!!

Having grown up in a family marred by alcoholism and relationship violence, I am the only one of six sisters who chose to remain childless. I have cried for our children many times, and for Trayvon.

I grieve, too, for those among us who are fear-based, and incapable of empathy. How negative and limited must be their existence!

I have nieces and nephews whose father was an amazing descendant of African-Americans, European settlers, and indigenous people. Throughout his life, he was an advocate for children. His children -- my nieces and nephews -- have faced prejudice from members of their own family. But those of us who love each other unconditionally comprise multi-hued, multicultural, and exuberant gatherings. Our children give me hope that racism will one day be a distant past.

9. Jury instructions - Rules for deliberation

RULES FOR DELIBERATION
These are some general rules that apply to your discussion. You must follow these
rules in order to return a lawful verdict:

1. You must follow the law as it is set out in these instructions. If you fail to follow
the law, your verdict will be a miscarriage of justice. There is no reason for failing
to follow the law in this case. All of us are depending upon you to make a wise and legal decision in this matter.

2. This case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the
testimony of the witnesses and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence
and these instructions.

3. This case must not be decided for or against anyone because you feel sorry for
anyone, or are angry at anyone.

4. Remember, the lawyers are not on trial. Your feelings about them should not
influence your decision in this case.

5. Your duty is to determine if George Zimmerman has been proven guilty or not, in
accord with the law. It is the Judge's job to determine a proper sentence if George Zimmerman is found guilty.

6. Whatever verdict you render must be unanimous, that is, each juror must agree
to the same verdict.

7. Your verdict should not be influenced by feelings of prejudice, bias or sympathy.
Your verdict must be based on the evidence, and on the law contained in these
instructions.

25. And that is impossible.

I'm not saying it should change. It's a good standard to strive for. But it's impossible. Outside the court we have to work for better understanding of one another so these rules can be acknowledged as the best we can attempt.

27. someone

please say something about this. If I do.......I'll just say, the instructions may have been there, with all the noise, they were not followed. B37 has proven that, book deal and all. Book deal got squashed though. Thank god she's not going to make money off this miscarriage. I wonder how many of these jurors consider themselves to be christian?

47. I lay plenty of fault on that jury......

They did not use their common sense in conjunction with the law. They only relied on the word of the only living witness who was proven to be a liar in that trial. They accepted the words of a liar as if those words were truth.

38. And juror #37 or whatever she is called, violated rule #7 which she admitted to when asked

if she sympathized with 'George' and/or with Trayvon. She also violated rule #3.

She claimed to know what was 'in George's heart' and worried about what would happen to him. Re Trayvon, she admitted to 'not knowing much about him'. Curious because presumably she knew neither of them but she did know that one of them was dead and that he was unarmed, was not doing anything wrong and was barely out of childhood. She knew that Zimmerman was an adult who was responsible for the death of an innocent teenager.

But she admitted that she sympathized with 'George' and worried about his future.

She didn't seem worried that Trayvon had no future.

If the rules mean anything, her interview should call the verdict into question based on that alone.

39. Did she say that those feelings influenced the verdict?

I don't think she did. It would be extremely cold hearted to sit through that trial and not have any feelings. There were a few posts on DU about one of the jurors weeping during the trial. I don't know if that is true, but it certainly isn't beyond belief. The jurors were tasked with evaluating the evidence without letting their feelings interfere. They're human, they're going to have feelings.

40. I listened to her interview and it was made clear by her that she 'understood' George, but admitted

she didn't know much about Trayvon.

I can't say for sure if she stated that her verdict was influenced by her sympathy for 'George' whom she spoke about as if she knew him. When asked if she felt that she knew him, she replied that 'yes she did'.

Someone in the system would have to listen to that interview to see if she was specific about her reasons for her verdict.

But it was clear from her own words that she had enormous sympathy for 'George'. That's fine, I often feel sorry for people who commit crimes wondering if their lives had been different, if they might have done what they did, and the tragedy of another wasted life. But that would not influence my opinion on their guilt or innocence.

I imagine her inerview and any given by the rest of the jurors will be analyzed.

50. they wept only during the prosecution's closing. so- no it did not influence them at all.

10. Not Surprised

I was stationed in SC after OCS and TBS when I was a 2NDLT. I was prior enlisted and spent some of my youth in government subsidized housing so diversity was nothing new and not an issue.

The CO's wife invited me to their church. I responded not thank because I was not a Christian. Others had warned me about this. Point against me.

I had a GYSGY in the zone for MSGT. He was a black guy and top notch. A major and LDO captain suggested that I don't write a stella fitrep for him and rank someone else higher. I wrote an OS report and rated him 1 of 5 because he deserved it. He made MSGT and was promoted. I was transferred to a line squadron and deployed within one month. Point against me.

I had to counsel a SSGT who was a Klan member complete with business cards. I gave him the choice of the Klan or the USMC. He decided to stay. I am not sure if he kept up his affiliation with the Klan or not. Point against me.

16. Thanks for expressing Your shock & dismay. We need awareness that this goes on every day!! n/t

17. Never attribute to malice that which is easily explained by stupidity...

...or ignorance. She displays signs of willful ignorance, she chose not to know. In her interview she was oblivious to the fact TM was a person, much less a child. The same way she saw the plants in her neighborhood, she saw black people as scenery. There was no hate, but no love or understanding as well. It simply never occurred to her to try to learn about people who didn't look like her.

I'm basing this on her statement about not writing a book. I think she learned something in he backlash around her behavior. She might have finally understood that she wasn't sequestered during the trail. She has spent her life sequestered from society. Judging from her wording (at least I'm hoping from her wording) she might be taking a look out of the door of her self imposed prison.

18. All I can say as a Canadian winter visitor to a little condo in South Florida, that Juror B37

has the same mindset that I've seen in several women I know living at that Condominium community.

Racism is fundamental to these women's worldview, although they took many months before expressing their true feelings about race to me. They knew I'd disagree, but that didnt stop them from telling me their thoughts.

One woman who teaches said "I don't care, but i hate blacks". and another told me that AA's don't have the same brain capacity as whites do. Of course, she is particularly dimwitted.

Then there is the defend the Condo-Castle mentality that no doubt created the idea of gated communities in the first place. And the trigger happy 911 callers...which in this case is a 30s white woman who feels entitled to call 911 at any perceived provocation.

Juror B37 could express herself to the women I met and have the same mindset mirrored back to her.

I don't think I can stand to stay there any longer.

Edit to add: These women also have their worldview shaped by Fox News reality TV viewing.

21. First, the hug. Now, I think that stupid knock knock joke said a lot more than we thought.

I live in Seattle. I happened to be in the Southeast (I'm from the South though not the area where we were) during the last week of the trial and what I was the most impressed by was the realization I always get when there that THERE ARE NO BLACK PEOPLE IN SEATTLE. As a result, the people in this area are comfortably "liberal" and never have to get to experience the fact of the pervasive presence of African American people in the world. They have no idea that there is an actual culture that has an everyday way of being that is interesting and valid and, if you take the trouble to try a little, enhances life a whole hell of a lot. And it's not homogenous; there are many cultures within, and all worth getting to know. But the people here don't have that opportunity so stereotypes, both "good" (if they can be) and bad pervade thinking.

I can't for the life of me figure out how six women from Florida could not have some kind of understanding of the world in which Trayvon lived and to which he contributed, but they either had to have been, as a result, exceptionally poor choices due to incredible naiveté or deep denial, or they lied and were chosen by a bunch of lawyers that were exceptionally naive or in denial. They should, imo, have risked some opinions being there and let them work it out. They all seemed to be Z's peers, but certainly not Trayvon's.

It reminds me a little of the struggles early on of the women's rights movement when some people worked so hard to say there are no differences that they denied the value and beauty of differences, and didn't bother to learn them and enjoy them and, for Christ's sake, talk about them!

In some places, and this is the hope I hold onto, this horrible event is becoming a jumping off place for conversation and not just shit-flinging. Trayvon's parents have been extraordinary in their efforts to make that happen, and I fervently hope they get something rolling that people become eager to join in on. Otherwise, we just shake our fists and run to our segregated corners and nothing changes.

29. been

31. It seems that way, but my sons' generation is so different. Far from perfect but so different.

They have a wonderful "well, yeah..." attitude about so many things that people older than they are (20s) struggle terribly with. I have hope. Change makes change, and it always has. I too wish it went a lot faster.

59. I'm still amazed at how they see it as "self-defense",

26. Infuriating, isn't it?

All I can say is I share your disgust. I found myself posting about it more here, too, lately. It's discouraging for me. I remember so clearly how great I felt about the election of Barack Obama to the Presidency in 2008. I thought - surely this is proof that America has FINALLY turned the page. And grown up just a wee bit. And finally gotten over some of this racist shit that's hampered our collective growth and maturity as a nation. That same contingent was barking at us in 2000 - to "get over it." Remember that? After bush v Gore? They bellowed and sneered. "Sore Loserman" they called us with arrogance, snark, and snot. Fully-loaded snot-noses. They laughed and jeered and scorned. "Get over it."

Well, I'd like to shove that "get over it" shit straight back down their miserable throats. I'll trade 'em one big "get over it" from 2000 for theirs that they've stuck to and nursed and perpetuated for about a century-and-a-half! No YOU closed-minded Bronze-Age assholes who are still pissing and moaning about how unfair it is that your precious fucking "freedom" is curtailed just because you're not allowed to own people anymore. YOU get over it. You're a century-and-a-half overdue and behind the times.

28. n/t

32. 2004? And she was 21?

So born in 1983.

Maybe from a small town.

When I was in Utah in 1985-86, I noticed (not that I was disturbed by it, but it was noteworthy) that there were many more hispanics than I was used to from back on the farm in South Dakota. I would expect her to be more used to diversity than I was. In my home town there were really no hispanics I can remember and only about two native Americans. There was one black kid, the grandson of my neighbor who visited for about a month every summer, and he was my little brother's best friend. They pretty much hung out all day for that month, or maybe longer.

But compared to where I was from, I would expect urban Utah to be far more "diverse" than my own past.

33. One of the biggest mistakes we humans make.

I've had this discussion, not this subject, but this discussion with my wife many times. The world does not see things the way I do, the way you do, or any of us. One of the first hurdles is that understanding. After you reach that understanding, you can affect those around much more.

We don't use the language the same, we don't think in the same ways, using the same imagery, or logical progressions. We don't even grow and mature the same way. One example I loved was a commercial from more than a decade ago. I can't find it to post here, but some may remember it. The scene was an art gallery, and there is this girl wearing jeans looking at a painting of yellow triangles with orange circles on it. The obvious art lover nerd is explaining the depth and meaning of the painting. A guy walks up in a rugby type of shirt and jeans and looks at the painting. He says "Nachos". The girl's face lights up and says. "Yeah". They walk off together. An elegant woman walks up and looks at the painting. This time, the art lover knows what to say. He says. "Nachos". The elegant woman rolls her eyes and says "Really." She walks off leaving the art lover behind.

Point of view is the point I'm getting to. To the younger hipper than thou crowd, that was a painting of Nachos. To the more educated, erudite, types, it was a statement on whatever was the meaning attached by the experts. Same painting, different points of view, different life experience to attach meaning to it. Different educations, and different understandings attached to those points of view.

Some will look at the Zimmerman event and wonder what all the fuss was about. Zimmerman obviously operated from a pure heart, trying to defend his neighbors from thefts and damage to their property. Now, here is the thing. To those people their point of view is just as valid as ours, and merely discounting them as racists is problematic. To others, Zimmerman was a hero type who was off on a search for glory, and was determined not to let the bad guy get away with anything. To those who see it that way, their point of view is just as valid as the first. To a third group, nobody acted well that night. To them, their point of view is just as valid.

So how do we bridge such enormous gaps in points of view? First, we must stop demonizing those who hold a valid (in their opinion) point of view. Just proclaiming that it was obviously a racial targeting and anyone who doesn't think so is a racist is juvenile, and counter-productive.

A couple months ago, I suggested we needed to start doing our homework. We needed to learn what the opponents thought, and what they meant. We could no longer just snort with derision and announce that anyone who didn't agree with us was an idiot, a fool, and or a racist. I was soundly denounced for this observation.

So time and time again, I watch this pattern of behavior end in disappointment for us, and time and time again I wonder when others on our side will finally see the truth. So far, I've been disappointed. Perhaps you are at the point where the truth is no longer able to be ignored. That to each of us, our point of view is valid, and before you can change that point of view, you have to treat it with enough respect to keep from insulting and turning the holder off. You can't bring them around to our point of view by insulting them and calling them idiots and racists. You can't force them to change, you can encourage them to think, explain respectfully how you see the situation, and then ask them to comment and then (Here is the hard part) discuss the events.

Only by learning to listen, as well as properly debate the issues, can we as a people move forward. For some even on these boards, the effort is wasted. They will not see things from any point of view that does not conform to their strict world view. No matter how often you point out the flaws in their arguments, they are like religious zealots clinging to their beliefs in the face of truth, logic, and facts. Some in the world will be equally obstinate. But by making the effort, you bring more of those capable of thinking for themselves to our side of the issues. Those who will watch, listen, and read will be swayed to your side, while those who are obstinately holding onto their narrow views will be reduced in numbers until they are a fraction of malcontents incapable of effecting the debate any longer. We will have moved on, and they will stay stubbornly behind.

41. I'm going to stick by my

conscious and say he was guilty, on the evidence. I think the evidence was ignored by the court, media and the jury. After everybody on that jury heard the evidence, apparently some did not come to the conclusion George Zimmerman was innocent.

We only know why one juror voted not guilty. If people want to think she went by evidence, it is their perrogative but she didn't in my mind. Four other jurors did not give any rationale why they voted not guilty but they just gave statements that they went by the evidence. That don't get them off the hook.

Only one juror hasn't even spoken, but we don't know the reasons why. Maybe in the future she will discuss it. I just wonder which juror thought he was guilty of second degree murder at first?

Geirge Zimmerman's criminal record was never let in by the judge because she called them "run of the mill". Those "run of the mill", was relevant to the case. They displayed the George Zimmerman was not just this mild person who wanted to do good things for anybody.

It showed he had an aggressive behavior and a temper, which goes directly proving he was capable of killing Trayvon out of anger and a sense of power. He assaulted an officer, when he thought tht officer stepped over the line with one of his friends. He assaulted his ex wife and saw her as his property.

Now we know there was another female witness who accuses him of racism and molesting her. The details about his incident with the motorist, fits right into the way he stalked and followed Trayvon Martin. That person should have been a witness. What I read was the motorist claims that he spitted gum out his car window while driving and George Zimmerman called the police on him.

He claimed George Zimmerman got crazy and started rear ending his car all the way to his parking lot. He claimed that George Zimmerman acted like he was going to attack him. When the police officer arrived, Zimmerman claimed that the guy spitted on his car and he didn't want him to get away. No charges were filed. But do you see the similarities? And it wasn't just these incidents that George Zimmerman has displayed a history of over aggressive behavior Think about what he would have done to Trayvon, if Trayvon refused to wait on the police for Zimmerman if he was so obssessed in catching him?. Zimmerman was capable of going off and he had that loaded gun. He could have just shot Martin for refusing to submitt to him. Being in a position of authority gave him power as well as his gun.

35. During the 90s and early 2000s conservative groups

Spent lots of time and money telling the public that affirmative action was unnecessary and outdated this day in age. And so abominations like prop 209 passed in CA.

Then president Obama was elected. The explosion of outspoken bigotry that has happened since, amplified by the media, and the NRA eager to sell guns to frightened bigots, illustrates why policies like Affirmative action need to be reinstated and continued for several more generations if we ever hope to effectively combat racism.

46. I take a different view on racism. I do think Affirmative Action has been used as a racial

hot button by the right. I favor stomping out racism directly, that requires that people that think right about fairness toward other human beings and not look the other way or flinch when faced with racist speech or a racist action. I view racism as both a moral problem and an economic problem. When business people allow racists to act by denying jobs to talented people, deserved promotions to effective employees, or denying contracts for products or services because of a person's race, the person denied suffers and the business is denied increased efficiency and profits. If serious business people started to view racism as a financial burden, sucking out money from companies, then the simple imperative for them would be to act to end racism, ensure fairness - when this is done right, the workforce and management becomes diverse and the company profits.

44. Look like three jurors who lived closed lives were picked and they got matched up with

three who had a more open view, but were weak. Remember, the first ballot was three to acquit, two to convict of manslaughter and one to convict of second degree murder. Somehow, the three that were for conviction came around to or were bullied into joining the three to acquit. If there is ever a book to come out of this, I want to see it come from the three that voted initially to convict, why they changed they minds and how they felt when they finally saw Trayvon Martin's parents get interviewed about their feelings and seeing how gracefully those parents are carrying themselves in the face of great pain for them. I don't care about ever hearing from the three that voted to acquit on the first ballot, in my mind, those people had their minds made up as soon as they sat in the jury box - they are an integral part of the larger racial problem we have in this country.

61. The sheer blindness of of these jurors astounds me too.

To me, the case was quite simple: Zimmerman shot and killed an unarmed kid; the rest was just smoke and mirrors. Even though I've been around fearful, ditzy old biddies like those jurors all my life. I just don't get it.